ABCMR Memorandum of                                                             AR2002078726
Consideration (cont)

MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 April 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002078726

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | | Director
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | | Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | | Chairperson
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | | Member
| Ms. Linda M. Barker | | Member

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be reimbursed for unused leave not taken during the period of 11 May through 14 July 2002, prior to his retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he had approved transition leave prior to his retirement but was unable to take his accrued leave because of medical treatment/surgery that he was undergoing prior to his retirement.  He goes on to state that he could not cash the leave in because he had already cashed in his maximum allowance of 60 days in a career.  In support of his application he submits medical documents describing the treatment he received, a copy of his report of separation (DD Form 214), copies of his travel orders and retirement orders and his Request and Authority for Leave (DA Form 31). 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the pay grade of E-3 on 18 May 1982 for a period of 4 years, training as a pharmacy specialist and assignment to Health Services Command.  He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 March 1994.

On 12 August 2001, orders were published at Fort Knox, Kentucky, authorizing the applicant's voluntary retirement effective 30 June 2002, with placement on the Retired List on 1 July 2002.

On 5 March 2002, he submitted a request for 53 days of transition leave (terminal leave) during the period of 19 April through 30 June 2002.  His request was approved.

On 11 April 2002, temporary duty (TDY) orders were published sending the applicant from Fort Knox, Kentucky, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) from 11 May 2002 until 2 June 2002 for an orthopedic referral.  They were subsequently amended to reflect a return date of 30 June 2002.

On 30 June 2002, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and was placed on the Retired List effective 1 July 2002.  He had served 20 years, 1 month and 13 days of total active service.

A review of the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) fails to show that the applicant ever requested an extension of his retirement effective date. 

Army Regulation 630-5 serves as the authority for leaves and passes.  It states, in pertinent part, that Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for soldiers who were not able to use their leave because military requirements prevented it.  Soldiers will not be required to use leave immediately prior to separation simply for the purpose of reducing leave balances.  On the other hand, use of leave as an extra money program defeats the intent of Congress to provide for the health and welfare of soldiers.  It should not be used either as a method of compensation or as a career continuation incentive.  It is specifically intended that large leave balances will not be accrued expressly for settlement upon release from active duty.  Additionally, leave will not be granted that will interfere with timely processing or transition.

Department of Defense (DOD) Financial Management Regulation (Also known as the DOD Pay Manual) provides, in pertinent part, that beginning on 10 February 1976, a military member may not be paid for more than 60 days of accrued leave during a career.  An exception to that provision was approved effective 2 August 1990, which allowed Reserve and Retired Component members who were called to active duty during the Persian Gulf Conflict to be paid for accrued leave over the 60-day limit.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was not authorized to be paid for his accrued leave at the time of his separation because he had previously cashed in his maximum entitlement of 60 days.

2.  While it is unfortunate that the applicant may have lost some of his accrued leave at the time of his separation, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he was unjustly denied the opportunity to take ordinary or terminal leave at some time prior to his scheduled separation date, or that he attempted to change the date of his retirement in order to avoid the loss of his leave.  

3.  Although it is not the intent of the Government that soldiers lose their accrued leave, soldiers are routinely denied transition leave due to mission essential needs.  There are no guarantees that transition leave will always be approved or that circumstances will change that prevent one from taking transition leave, which is an inherent risk in accumulating large sums of leave for such purposes.

4.  Notwithstanding the foregoing conclusions, there are no provisions in the applicable law that allow for payment to the applicant for leave lost.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___rjw __  ___bje___  ___lb ___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID | AR2002078726
SUFFIX |
RECON | YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED | 2003/04/08
TYPE OF DISCHARGE |
DATE OF DISCHARGE |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |
DISCHARGE REASON |
BOARD DECISION | DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY |
ISSUES         1.  255 | 121.0300/PAY FOR LEAVE
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |